Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Communication Services · ·
$93.46
▼ $0.62 (-0.7%)
Market data updated: 09/19 02:18 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/19/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
Not available
Day Range
$91.50 - $94.44
52-Week Range
$65.76 - $147.25
Beta
—
Next Earnings
04.11.2026
Support
$82.48
Resistance
$98.21
ECHO is a stock from the Communication Services sector — Telecom, media, and internet/social platforms — revenue from advertising and subscriptions.
+31.2% (1Y)
Strengths: 9/29 factors positiveRisk: High
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Golden Cross
SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200
Technical
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: -$48.93 vs. price $93.46 (-152.4%)
Fair Value
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
91/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
92/100
Analog Quality
-6.4%
Median 40D Outcome
56/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
40%
+5.4% … +7.6%
🟡 Base
13%
-0.0% … +0.6%
🔴 Bearish
47%
-13.2% … -8.6%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 40 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 40% (95% CI 20%–64%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -0.3%.
Echo #1 — Momentum Breakout
4 occurrence(s) · 50% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 40% (20%–64%) | +0.4% | -3.9% … +4.2% | -0.1% |
| 10D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.4% | -5.3% … +7.0% | -0.4% |
| 20D | 40% (20%–64%) | -0.3% | -9.1% … +5.9% | -1.0% |
| 40D | 40% (20%–64%) | -6.4% | -9.5% … +3.7% | -0.6% |
| 60D | 27% (11%–52%) | -0.9% | -6.9% … +4.1% | -1.0% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-01-28 | 91/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -0.3% | +0.8% |
| 2021-02-25 | 85/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +4.9% | +12.9% |
| 2020-08-13 | 84/100 | Consolidation | -8.9% | -19.8% |
| 2019-04-22 | 82/100 | Consolidation | +5.0% | +14.5% |
| 2019-01-11 | 81/100 | Consolidation | +7.0% | -0.4% |
| 2023-01-19 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +0.9% | -0.1% |
| 2022-08-10 | 80/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -15.7% | -15.8% |
| 2018-11-27 | 79/100 | Consolidation | -16.3% | -6.7% |
| 2022-11-01 | 79/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -8.3% | -3.6% |
| 2019-02-11 | 79/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -10.7% | -0.9% |
| 2023-01-03 | 78/100 | Downtrend | +11.1% | +7.5% |
| 2019-05-10 | 78/100 | ✓ Consolidation | +6.8% | +7.4% |
| 2020-07-30 | 77/100 | Downtrend | +7.8% | -4.8% |
| 2018-12-12 | 77/100 | Downtrend | -2.8% | -7.2% |
| 2020-09-18 | 77/100 | ✓ Consolidation | -9.3% | -24.9% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLC (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
46
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
26
Quality
42
Value
38
Momentum
78
Risk
42
Sentiment
68
Fundamental
21
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING ECHO...
Recent media coverage of EchoStar has centered on its stock performance and strategic shift, with analysts highlighting its potential upside tied to a 2% stake in SpaceX. On September 8, 2026, UBS upgraded EchoStar to a "Buy" rating, citing its transformation from a wireless operator to an investment-focused entity following asset sales. The upgrade included a raised price target to $150, driving a 4.2% stock increase, as investors viewed the SpaceX stake as undervalued.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about EchoStar. News trend score: 68. Reason: 8 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 5 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
31
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
30
Psychology
100
Fundamentals
21
Technical
78
Valuation
38
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price, sentiment, and valuation keep confirming each other upward while the actual fundamentals deteriorate.
The stock is moving in lockstep with its peers at the same intensity, rather than on its own data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Price (3M)
-14%
Market Narrative
61
Fundamental Reality
30
Narrative Gap
+31
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
The market behavior for ECHO suggests dominant overconfidence, as price momentum (+7.5%) far outpaces deteriorating fundamentals (EPS growth -113.6%). Confirmation bias and anchoring are secondary, with traders favoring narrative over reality. The 32-point narrative gap and loss aversion signals indicate selective attention to positive signals despite recent underperformance. The key question is whether traders will sustain overconfidence or adjust as fundamentals diverge further from price action.
Updated: 09/09/2026, 02:46 PM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"UBS resumed coverage of the stock with a Buy rating and a $150 price target, sending the stock up 4.2%"
"EchoStar's stock upside could be primarily driven by its expected 2% stake in SpaceX"
"UBS upgrade reflects EchoStar's transformation from wireless operator to investment vehicle"
📈 18D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Charles Mackay — 77/100
🔴 Weakest match
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor) — 0/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide among methodologies, with scores ranging from a near-universal red flag to cautious optimism. Benjamin Graham, Walter Bagehot, and even the Enterprising Investor variant all reject it outright, citing extreme risk or lack of statistical value—Graham’s defensive framework sees it as fundamentally flawed, while Bagehot flags liquidity concerns. Meanwhile, Peter Lynch and Philip Fisher dismiss it for failing to meet their growth-at-reasonable-price or quality thresholds, reinforcing a consensus that the stock lacks the fundamentals or momentum they prioritize. On the other end, Charles Mackay’s crowd-behavior lens suggests early signs of speculative excitement, while Howard Marks (without cycle context) sees a solid business with potentially inflated expectations. The contrast highlights a tension between risk-averse, value-driven investors and those attuned to speculative trends or market psychology, with most disciplined approaches steering clear.
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🟢 77
No obvious signs of crowd mania
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟢 69
Looks early-to-mid cycle, not overextended
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🟡 63
Mixed — a good business, but expectations may already be high
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 56
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 40
Negative trend — against Livermore's core rule of trading with the trend
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 34
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🔴 32
Risk profile Loeb would flag as a real threat to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 20
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🔴 17
Doesn't show the stability Smith's long-term case requires
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🔴 13
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🔴 12
Pattern Veblen would flag as growth pursued for its own sake
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🔴 8
Doesn't clear Lynch's growth-at-a-reasonable-price bar
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🔴 7
Doesn't show the quality/growth signature Fisher required
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 0
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 35%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🔴 0
Liquidity position Bagehot would flag as a real risk
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 0
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
⚠️ Partial data for this stock — score is less reliable — Data availability: 45%
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (9 bullish · 2 bearish · 2 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
A pattern consistent with an early/mid accumulation phase — a trading range after a decline with declining volume.
Medium confidence
$82.48
Range Bottom
$98.21
Range Top
50
Trading Days in Range
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
—
Operating Margin
-118.1%
Net Margin
-96.6%
EBITDA Margin
-107.5%
ROE
-251.4%
ROA
-33.7%
ROIC
—
EPS
-$50.41
Cash
$1.88B
Total Debt
—
Current Ratio
0.42
Debt/Equity
—
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$93.46
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
-$48.93
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-152.4%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
-5.0%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -5.0% | $-1.01B | $-928.30M |
| 2 | -3.1% | $-980.23M | $-825.04M |
| 3 | -1.2% | $-967.98M | $-747.45M |
| 4 | 0.6% | $-974.03M | $-690.02M |
| 5 | 2.5% | $-998.38M | $-648.88M |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$-1.07B
Terminal Value
$-15.74B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$-10.23B
Enterprise Value
$-14.07B
Net Debt
$0
Equity Value
$-14.07B
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$20.05
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$19.86
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 8 positive, 7 neutral, 5 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Benzinga · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Benzinga · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 16.9.2026
Yahoo · 15.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
Benzinga · 14.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 14.9.2026
24/7 Wall St. · 13.9.2026
Yahoo · 13.9.2026
MarketBeat · 10.9.2026
The Wall Street Journal · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
MT Newswires · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Proactive · 8.9.2026
Yahoo · 8.9.2026
Proactive · 8.9.2026
EchoStar (ECHO) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 46/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
ECHO currently scores 46/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure. StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, ECHO's estimated fair value is -$48.93, which is 152.4% below the current price of $93.46. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
ECHO's technical score is 78/100, which currently reads as bullish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: SMA 50 recently crossed above SMA 200; Price is above the 50-day average; MACD histogram is positive — rising momentum.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: -$48.93 vs. price $93.46 (-152.4%); Operating margin: -118.1% (negative); Net margin: -96.6% (negative).
StockIQ has no recorded dividend payment history for ECHO.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 7 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wade William David | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 2,425 | -2,425 | $91.48 |
| Wade William David | Open Market Sale | 13.8.2026 | 324 | -2,425 | $91.48 |
| Wade William David | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 2,575 | -2,575 | $92.65 |
| Wade William David | Open Market Sale | 12.8.2026 | 2,749 | -2,575 | $92.65 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | $89.90 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 3,508 | -3,508 | — |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 5,000 | +5,000 | $25.19 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 3,508 | +3,508 | $26.60 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 3,508 | -3,508 | $89.73 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 5,000 | -5,000 | — |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 5,653 | +5,000 | $25.19 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 4,161 | +3,508 | $26.60 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Open Market Sale | 7.8.2026 | 653 | -3,508 | $89.73 |
| BYE STEPHEN J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 7.8.2026 | 0 | -3,508 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 29.7.2026 | 1,502,440 | +1,502,440 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 29.7.2026 | 1,502,440 | -1,502,440 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 29.7.2026 | 6,497,560 | -1,502,440 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 29.7.2026 | 1,512,948 | +1,502,440 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 20.7.2026 | 5,000,000 | -5,000,000 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 20.7.2026 | 5,000,000 | +5,000,000 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 20.7.2026 | 10,508 | -5,000,000 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 20.7.2026 | 5,000,000 | +5,000,000 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Other Transaction | 10.7.2026 | 15,939,781 | +15,939,781 | — |
| Telluray Holdings, LLC | Other Transaction | 10.7.2026 | 15,939,781 | +15,939,781 | — |
| ERGEN CHARLES W | Gift | 10.7.2026 | 18,561,842 | -18,561,842 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
27,787,201 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 27,285,044 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
43.3% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 41.1% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology